Women gets to drip acid into a mans eyes by court rule

[vlad321]

sapphi_snake said:

vlad321 said:

No it will not change his mind, but it will prevent him from doing many other horrendous things that he would be able to do if he is able to see.

I also guarantee you that being threatened by blinding via acid is far, FAR, more of a deterrent than "yeah, you have to go to an institution" expecially if it is publicized well.  People should be institutionalized BEFORE they commit a crime, not after. After certain inhumane crimes they deserve to be treated as non-humans, hence the word inhumane, and lose any rights that normal human beings have.

History proves that harsh punishments don't make people less likely to commit a crime in the long-term. You have to go after what causes people to commit these crimes in the first place if you want good long-term results. Most of the time these people are just  product of their own culture (like this guy). I also disagree with the ideea that there should be any situation in which people lose their rights.

Oh really? History tells us that? When in history have we had something  that informs you of the news like the Internet? Hell I'll even set for something like a TV? A radio?

Historically just about everyone other than whoever was at the execution heard about what happens to criminals by word of mouth, or if they are lucky in a newspaper if they can read (lower classes couldn't read until recently). Maybe, just maybe, if some sociopath play the video of the guy who had acid dripped in his eyes, or if the video is uploaded for some reason, he will be able to see just what happens when he pulls some retarded stuff and appeal to his very basic instinct of survival.

As I said, he should have been institutionalized BEFORE he commited any crime. After he commited it, what the hell is the point? He already committed the crime, he should be punished accordignly. Honestly I don't think it should be an eye for an eye. If malicious intent was involved, then the wronged should be able to choose the punishment of the perpertrator, as long as it is within reasonable limits. That right there is perfect justice. 

When you throw him in an institutionor in jail did you prevent his doing terrible things than when he is blind? In other cases, if you kill the motherfucker outright with chances are there of him doing anything wrong to others? Let me put it this way. It is really nice and great to sit on high and look on below and speak, but when shit happens to you, that is when you grow a real pair of balls and realize that there are just humans who should never be allowed to live in a society, and special some should be punished by brutal torture (I don't believe in this hell shit they talk about in fairy tales, they need to suffer while alive for me to be happy) before being killed. The whole "let's fix human society by locking away people even if they have commited inhuman acts" is EXTREMELY idealistic. It is the exact equivalent of me saying that communism works. Well I hate to break your fragile ignorant world, but it DOESN'T work, some are not worthy of being called a human, and it is laughable to think an institionalization as a punishment will actually do anything down the road. What kind of a deterent is it knowing you will be in an institutionalized? You have to appeal to much more basic things, like the instinct of survival, to these sub-humans so you can prevent crime.